Page 24 of 26

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 9:29 pm
by _Ray A
Yong Xi wrote:
I am not sure the claims that the Book of Mormon is of divine origin can be separated from historical claims. Who was Moroni?


Many non-Mormon scholars accept it for what it is - pseudepigrapha.

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 10:00 pm
by _Polygamy-Porter
why me wrote:
Polygamy-Porter wrote:Fine Walmart, here is your chance.

Tell us YOUR middle ground of Mormonism.

Do you attend church services AT ALL? No
Pay ANY TITHES? no
Attend temple? no
Do home teaching? no
Have home teachers over? yes
Married? no In the temple? yes
Wear gaments? no
How many years ago did you do any of the above? don' remember

Do you drink alcohol? no
Smoke?
Drink coffee or tea? no
View porn? what is porn?
Masturbate? solitary sex?

Please be candid and honest. It's not like any one on these boards knows you in real life.


Such is my middle way.
Thank you for your reply.

in my opinion, you are less of a member than I am.

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 10:13 pm
by _Nevo
Yong Xi wrote:I am not sure the claims that the Book of Mormon is of divine origin can be separated from historical claims. Who was Moroni?

I'm not sure that they can either. Bill Hamblin, for example, has argued strenuously that the view that Joseph Smith wrote "inspired" pseudepigraphy is untenable for the reason that there were either gold plates and an angel or there weren't. And if there weren't any plates or an angel, then Joseph Smith was a fraud (either lying or deluded)—not a prophet (since God wouldn't be a party to fraud).

I find Hamblin's logic compelling, but at the same time I wonder how to reconcile what I take to be Joseph's sincerity in his prophetic claims with a scripture that I regard as religiously meaningful but less than completely ancient.

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 11:23 pm
by _Yong Xi
Nevo wrote:
Yong Xi wrote:I am not sure the claims that the Book of Mormon is of divine origin can be separated from historical claims. Who was Moroni?

I'm not sure that they can either. Bill Hamblin, for example, has argued strenuously that the view that Joseph Smith wrote "inspired" pseudepigraphy is untenable for the reason that there were either gold plates and an angel or there weren't. And if there weren't any plates or an angel, then Joseph Smith was a fraud (either lying or deluded)—not a prophet (since God wouldn't be a party to fraud).

I find Hamblin's logic compelling, but at the same time I wonder how to reconcile what I take to be Joseph's sincerity in his prophetic claims with a scripture that I regard as religiously meaningful but less than completely ancient.


You may not be able to reconcile that.

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 11:30 pm
by _Yong Xi
why me wrote:The mantra that there is no middle way is just wishful thinking since many could not find their own middle way as members. But it does exist. There are many inactives or semiactives that are not hostile against the lds church and would defend it, if they were given the chance.


Yes, the church has tribal members. No surprise there.

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:44 pm
by _JohnStuartMill
asbestosman wrote:
JohnStuartMill wrote:Also, I don't think you're an idiot -- far from it. In fact, that's why I try so hard with you: I think that, perhaps unlike Gazelam and bcspace, you ought to know better.

*sigh*
You may mean well, but I don't like it when I'm compared to others in a way that tacitly puts them down. Furthermore I disagree--I don't find myself smarter than them. In math / computer engineering (my talents / passions) yes, but I see them tell good jokes and think of things I hadn't thought of (and probably couldn't have).
I'm not even necessarily saying that you're smarter than they are. I'm just saying that I know you're capable of following an argument to its conclusion, based on my interactions with you, and that I can't say the same for Gazelam and bcspace.

I also think Daniel Peterson is much more capable (academically) than I am and I believe his testimony is stronger than mine. I'm not living on his borrowed light. I'm just saying that I don't think one should suspect that academic ability or history should somehow imply that one is more likely to agree with you because it makes him more logical or academic or whatever you think the key difference is (I don't know what you are thinking, but it appears to be related to academic ability).

Academic ability is not the standard I'm using here, no. I know too many educated idiots and too many profoundly sensible high school dropouts to fall into that simple trap. Remember that I don't make fun of bcspace because he lacks a rigorous education; I make fun of bcspace because he lacks a rigorous education AND he tried to pull academic rank on me.

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:30 pm
by _Trevor
Nevo wrote:Bill Hamblin, for example, has argued strenuously that the view that Joseph Smith wrote "inspired" pseudepigraphy is untenable for the reason that there were either gold plates and an angel or there weren't. And if there weren't any plates or an angel, then Joseph Smith was a fraud (either lying or deluded)—not a prophet (since God wouldn't be a party to fraud).

I find Hamblin's logic compelling, but at the same time I wonder how to reconcile what I take to be Joseph's sincerity in his prophetic claims with a scripture that I regard as religiously meaningful but less than completely ancient.


A constipated man strains strenuously at his stool, too, but it doesn't mean that what he's giving birth to is a lump of gold. I am sure we can all be confident Bill knows exactly what God will or will not do. That's why they pay him the big bucks down there at the Y.

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:36 pm
by _Tchild
Nevo wrote:I find Hamblin's logic compelling, but at the same time I wonder how to reconcile what I take to be Joseph's sincerity in his prophetic claims with a scripture that I regard as religiously meaningful but less than completely ancient.

Now that is interesting. I would be curious to know how you believe the Book of Mormon could be partly ancient. Which parts do you believe to be authentically ancient and which would you suggest are creations of its author Joseph Smith?

If you've got the time and all.

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 6:29 am
by _Nevo
Tchild wrote:Now that is interesting. I would be curious to know how you believe the Book of Mormon could be partly ancient. Which parts do you believe to be authentically ancient and which would you suggest are creations of its author Joseph Smith?

I don't think the Book of Mormon is a patchwork of ancient and modern pieces. If there are both ancient and modern elements in the book, then I expect we're dealing with something along the lines of Blake Ostler's theory of the Book of Mormon as a modern expansion of an ancient source.

Re: I quit the Church!!!

Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:05 pm
by _thews
why me wrote:It would be great if someone would prove the Book of Mormon false. I would celebrate that happening. No one should be living a fraud. But that hasn't happened yet. Wishful thinking on the part of the antimormons just doesn't cut it. Until the book is proven false, I am under no delusions.


New to this board, but I find your opinion of ex-Mo's and anti-Mormons quite typical of judgmental Mormons who point their fingers in a patronizing manner as if you somehow know what's inside their heads or what motivates them more than they do. I am an ex-Mo and an anti-Mormon (a.k.a. "critic"), and I assure you that the Book of Mormon is false and can be proven false if you could possibly think critically. Joseph Smith was nothing more than a con man with a narcissistic personality disorder, and the other "saints" were in it for the women they'd be "given." But, in order to decide whether or not something is true or false, one has to want to know the truth and be able to think critically. If you don't want to know the truth, then you can keep rationalizing all the things that don't make sense to balance the scales of your cognitive dissonance.


To Paul O - I've read most your responses and I think your attitude is a very healthy one. Looking at the world objectively without being driven by fear will bring you truth. You'll probably find LDS friends that will shun you for deciding to think for yourself and make a choice in your life. It is your life, and the people you'll meet and experiences you'll have in the real world should be fun. When the simple task of buying underwear you want to wear feels like freedom, things like beer and football on Sundays will knock your socks off. Welcome to the real world... figuring out who God is will be the hard part, or if you believe in God, but as long as it's your choice based on your truth you can't be wrong.